Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Gun Rights Lawsuit Hits Maryland

August 4, 2010 by  

Gun Rights Lawsuit Hits MarylandAfter the Supreme Court decision in McDonald v Chicago earlier this year, which struck down a 30-year-old handgun ban in the city, gun rights supporters vowed to keep the momentum for less regulation. In fact, some of them are now suing Maryland to prove that commitment.

The Federal lawsuit against the state authorities was brought on July 29 by The Second Amendment Foundation and state resident Raymond Woollard who claims his handgun permit renewal was denied because, according to the state, he could not demonstrate "a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger."

According to the lawsuit, “individuals cannot be required to demonstrate that carrying a handgun is ‘necessary as a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger’ as a prerequisite for exercising their Second Amendment rights.” As a result, Woollard is seeking a permanent injunction against enforcement of the Maryland law that requires it.

The SAF says the plaintiff first received his permit after a man broke into his house in 2002. That man, who was released from prison in 2005, allegedly lives three miles from Woollard’s house.ADNFCR-1961-ID-19915690-ADNFCR

Special To Personal Liberty

You Sound Off! is written by our readers and appears the last Wednesday of each month. If you would like to submit an article or letter to the editor for consideration for You Sound Off!, send it to yousoundoff@personalliberty.com by the Friday before the last Wednesday of the month. To be considered, a submission should be 750 words or less and must include the writer's name, address and a telephone number. Only the writer's name will be published. Anonymous submissions will not be considered.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Gun Rights Lawsuit Hits Maryland”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • http://?? Joe H.

    I hope EVERY CITY IN THE US that has restrictive gun laws takes them to court!!! They have to fight for their rights!!!

    • Al Sieber

      they’ll only get our guns if we let them, it seems we’re always fighting this issue.

      • ANTICRIME

        Al, As long as we have Marxists in government we will be constantly fighting for our Constitutional rights, my friend!

        • 45caliber

          But you don’t understand! The only “right” you have is the right to obey when they tell you what to do.

    • Lev

      I do not understand the anti gun activists. The either do not understand the wording of the 2nd amendment or they completely ignore it and try to redefine its definition.
      The part that I stick to is the part that reads “The right of a free people to keep and bare arms” “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”. The words “Shall Not” is an order to the government to leave this Amendment completely alone.
      These simple words, to us, seem to be the most understood words to the government. I would love to ask them what part of this do they not understand.

      • independant thinker

        They always seem to get hung up on the militia part while having absolutely no idea what it actualy refers to.

        • http://LibertyDigest Michael G.

          A while back my daughter and son-in-law took me to a historic site in North Carolina(Fort Dobbs). I learned something quite interesting and it dealt with the militia. The regular army in those days were the British (This is French & Indian War times), They got paid as they should have. The Proventials came from nearby communities and were made up of Americans. They got paid if there was money in the ’till.’ The militia were strictly voluntary, and these folks didn’t get paid. So people today that equate the militia with the National Guard are completely off base. The National Guard most likely was more equivalant to the Provintials.
          I am in the militia according the the Constitution.

        • GreyChief

          It is as 45caliber says, they know what the 2 A. says, and what the militia clause is about, but they do not admit it. The ACLU is ***STILL*** trying to maintain the “collective right” interpretation of the 2A., even after it was so totally demolished in Heller, and again in McDonald. That “interpretation” of 2 A. is a pile of rubble.

          I came across one of these rationalizers who claimed the Founding Fathers said – right in the second amendment – they wanted “well-regulated guns”. He could not explain how the phrase “well regulated “ (meaning “properly functioning” in 1776) did not modify the word “militia”, but traveled through both space and time to become a “well-regulated” ( in the modern sense of ‘lots of rules and regulations’) “right of the People to keep and bear arms”.

          There is no limit to their excess. The will “put language and logic on the rack” and stretch it and twist it until it comes out the way they wish it was.

      • 45caliber

        They understand what it says as well as you do. But they don’t trust you – or anyone else except them – with a gun. So their entire rigamaroll is to come up with a way to deprive you of your gun despite what it says. So far the conservatives on the SCOTUS have agreed that they don’t have that right, but they are trying hard. And too many judges including four on the SC are willing to let them.

      • Paul

        The RIGHT OF FREE PEOPLE is the phrase they will be attacking next,freedom,which we will Not have soon if we don’t fight back in November and vote this administration out of office.

      • Harold Olsen

        The left reads into the Constitution what they wants to read. For example, they read “freedom of religion” as “freedom from religion”. I understand that there are altered versions of the U. S. Constitution being distributed around the country. One version has added the “separation of church and state” clause to the first amendment that has only ever appeared in the constitution of the USSR, which is defended by the ACLU and which is why I believe they are distributing some of these altered constitutions. The left considers the Constitution to be an illegal document and I’ve been waiting for some years now for some idiot activist judge to declare that the U. S. Constitution is unconstitutional.

        • 45caliber

          I do know of people who have been arrested and jailed for teaching what your rights are in the Constitution.

      • DaveH

        Lev,
        You were correct with your second presumtion. The Liberals know damn well what the 2nd Amendment says. They don’t care. They want the guns out of our hands because they want complete control of us and they can’t have that with an armed population.

      • James

        Lev, Well said! I would correct your quote, though, by changing “a free” to “the,” and before government I would add “federal.” State constitutions have similar restrictions placed upon them, but the Bill of Rights are restrictions on the federal government.

    • http://goggle jimradford

      yes i belive that any state does not have the right to stop you from haveing a gun if you have a valid reason for it,they should allso go to wepons classes to learn about there guns and

      • independant thinker

        Define valid reason.

  • s c

    First, OUT with ALL career politicians. Second, defend the Second Amendment at all costs
    because the First Amendment dying. Third, If you can’t stock up guns and ammunition, learn
    what else you can use for weapons.

    • Lev

      I meant to say “MISUNDERSTOOD’ in my last post.

    • http://LibertyDigest Michael G.

      Use a sword, bow and arrow, club, whatever is at hand. You may have to. The secret is start stocking up on ammo, and the ability to reload if you haven’t already started. It will take time, so don’t delay. My wife asked me what I was going to do with the ammunition, and I told her: “Hopefully nothing…”

      • marcel duranleau

        Get ready for the day. Arm yourself now. Guns with a lot of ammunitions. Knifes,bows and arrows,rocks. Train everybody in your
        family, children, grandchildrens,grandparents males and females.No choice freedom or detentions camps? Sacrifice,sacrifice. I go without
        food to be able to get more ammunitions. I prefer freedoom than having a ful stomach. DON`T BE TOO SOFT WITH YOURSELF IF YOU DO YOU WILL BE A LOSER. BE STRONG AND BE A GOOD COURAGE. DON`T BE AFRAID OF
        THEIRS FACES.DON`T BE AFRAID OF MEN=DEVIL. Be like King David who was afraid of God. King Saul was afraid of men.God can do more to us than
        the Whole world. http://www.obamacrimes.com/ Impeach marxist Obama now.

  • Viktor Leben

    IT TOOK 30 YEARS TO GET RID OF THE GUN BAN ? THE 2ND AMENDMENT IS PRACTICALLY DEAD !!!

    • Wiccanwolf

      The 2nd isn’t dead, people are fighting to bolster it, to get restrictive laws repealed so we can fight back against criminals on the streets and those with 3 piece suits. Since the government has forgotten that the Constitution limits what they can do, the 2nd gives us the means to reign them in.

      • Lev

        The 2nd Amendment is our Liberty Teeth. The only thing that we have to fight back with and the government knows this. This is probably the main reason they would love to disarm us. What is it that they fear about us remaining armed???

        • 45caliber

          If we remain armed, they can’t do what they would really like to do – make slaves of us all. So the guns MUST go.

          • http://LibertyDigest Michael G.

            Let ‘em try that one, and see where it gets them.

          • DaveH

            They are already stepping all over our freedom. Can you imagine what they would do to us if we were disarmed?

        • Paul

          I’m embarressed to say I joined the NRA some years ago and the organization has moved to the obama side after they made a deal with him.Charlston Heston is turning over in his grave.I have since relinquished my membership.

    • Vicki

      It took 30 years to get rid of it in Chicago. In terms of time that is but a moment. We have been and are continuing the fight to re-establish the full power of the 2nd Amendment thanks to the recent decisions by the Supreme Court.

  • Jim H.

    You have to PROVE” a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger”? What does that mean? You need to PROVE you WILL be in danger in the future? Do you need to PROVE your house WILL catch fire to get a fire extinguisher? Who gets to decide if you PROVED you are in danger? What part of the 2nd amendment REQUIRES you to prove “a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger” I missed that part.

    • Robin from Arcadia, IN

      Jim H… I agree. It is ludicrous to have to prove that you may be in danger in the future. Who are these people that actually get this kind of thinking into law? Common sense dictates that being prepared is better than not being prepared.

      • s c

        Robin, common sense used to be and should always be the ‘gold standard’ in reaching decisions. When lawyers, political parties, a warped Congress and the ACLU team up to view pc as a universal religion and reset priorities, common sense gets tossed out the door like a bag of old trash.
        That should help explain America’s two major political parties, the current denizens of the White House, Congress, Eric Holder and the ACLU, and put America’s ‘mental asylum’ in a clearer light.

        • Gramps

          SC you had said it so well

      • http://LibertyDigest Michael G.

        It is a better thing to have the (gun) and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

        • DaveH

          And it’s better to be judged by 12, than to be carried by 6.

    • independant thinker

      You have to PROVE” a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger”?

      This phrase bhas bothered me since I first read it. I finally see what bothered me about it. If the danger is apprehended then it would no longer be a a danger.

      • James

        Independant T, As used here “apprehended” is a secondary meaning of the verb “apprehend,” it means a “perceived danger.” Perceived means an “at hand” present danger as opposed to some possible future danger. If one had to prove his danger was ‘at hand’ before being allowed to purchase a firearm, he probably would have been killed or harmed before he got to the gun store. Hence the silliness of the requirement.

    • 45caliber

      Jim: I read about this elsewhere too. The victim was able to get a gun permit but they refused to allow him to renew it since the criminal was now out of jail. The criminal had threatened him; he wants one for protection. But the authorities basically have said the criminal has agreed he won’t actually carry out any threats so obviously the guy no longer needs a gun. Besides, if the criminal did carry out his threats, the guy might shoot him. That would mean a lawyer might lose a client, the judge wouldn’t be needed for a trial, etc.

    • http://goggle jimradford

      iam with you on that point big time, just stop and thaink of the fool who made that law up, does he have good reason for the statment, or does he like to sound stupid.

  • http://jgraf@scottsbluff.net James Graf

    It has been proven. when the crooks know that you have that right to carry a gun. That there are less crimes committed. One should be able to defend ones self. I did when I was young, and older. It has stopped a few crimes.

    • vicki

      We all HAVE that right. Criminals are deterred when we EXERCISE that right.

  • James M. Lee

    This is NOT about “gun control”, this is about POWER for centralized decision making and ‘government’, and protection by the nanny state.

    Throw the bums out! Vote no on incumbents, as fear of loss of power and profit from office is all they understand.

    Awake America!

    • DaveH

      Here in Arizona, all the RINO John McCain need do is to hit us with a barrage of ads proclaiming his anti-illegal and conservative policies and the Republican voters swoon and accept his candidacy like a bunch of love-sick teenagers.
      You’re right. We need to get rid of the incumbents, but it appears that the Republican Party is not with us in that effort.
      Don’t waste your vote on a Republican. Vote Libertarian. We are the party of Principles. We do not put our finger to the wind to decide what our policies are going to be that year. We are unwaveringly Pro-Freedom. For Individual Freedom, Personal Responsibility, Free Markets, and Limited Government:
      http://libertarianparty.org/platform

  • http://personallibertydigest M. swafford

    Wow, another example of non thinking law makers reaching for reason. sothing that is beyond them. this should be an eazy case if not for the non thinking liberal judges!

  • Rich

    Two good things came from France . . french fries and the guillotine. Anyone have blueprints for a guillotine?

    Ask yourself this questions, “What is worse corrupt politicians or the people who elect them?”

    • Bob

      That’s a tough question. People should have to take a test on laws and history before they are eligible to vote. That would save money because most of the polls would be closed.

      • http://LibertyDigest Michael G.

        Seems to me that it was only property owners who could vote. It’s still not a bad way of going…

      • DaveH

        For sure, the people who pay no income taxes should not be allowed to vote how our money is going to be spent.

    • 45caliber

      I don’t need a blueprint for a guillotine; I can design one in my sleep.

    • Harold Olsen

      Both are bad. However, what is worse are the people who continue to reelect corrupt politicians.

    • Pat R

      Rich:

      There are several thousand guillotines in the US at this time! Too bad that they belong to the Muslims; preparing for Shariah law. (This info totally stunned me when I first read it several months ago.)

    • http://goggle jimradford

      both of them, they walk hand by hand to act stupid, and dont know it.

  • James L.

    Now I get to reply to my own post:

    The POWER they have, and freely threaten us with, was granted to them by us! It is ours as an “inalienable” right from our creator. We need to take the power back one incumbent at a time, each time we vote.

    If you vote for someone because they are a ‘Republicrat’, or a ‘Demublican’ then you deserve what you get…a POLITICIAN. Stop looking at the letter after their name and educate yourself on their voting record, NOT their promises or rhetoric, or clubs they join to look good. Remember, Harry Reid is an NRA member…so what?

    • Dagney

      I sincerely doubt anyone, except maybe the progressive trolls, vote the straight party line. Most people who comment here seem pretty much to think for themselves.

      • independant thinker

        Dagney………………You are wrong. I do not know how many I have heard the following in these or similar words.

        “My daddy voted democrat and I have always voted democrat and I am not going to change now.”

        • Bob

          Back in the 50s when I was a kid people said the Dems were for the working man and the Reps for the rich.

          • independant thinker

            I remember hearing that back then as well (we are dating ourselves aren’t we Bob)and it might have had some truth to it at that time but now it seems neither party truely represents the working man

          • 45caliber

            They were right then, Bob. About 1965 the Dems discovered that the black minority basically voted as a block. They went after the black vote by promising all sorts of things to be paid for by the “rich”. The workers in the South, at least, soon learned that they were considered the “rich” by the Dems and switched to the GOP because they were more conservative – not because they liked the GOP. The Dems have never admitted that they basically scammed the workers for more votes. The unions, in the north, however, preferred the Dems because the Dems were willing to cut them deals so they insured that their people stayed Dem for the most part. You can see the deals going on now in fact.

          • DaveH

            The Dems said they were for the “working man”. But almost everything they do screws the “working man”. What they are for is Big Government. And they have effectively labeled the Republicans’ affinity for Free Markets as being “for the rich” when in reality less regulations (Free Markets) makes for more competition which the Rich do not want. The Rich much prefer to be protected from competition with regulations that are too expensive for smaller competitors to remain in business.
            In reality, the bigger the Government gets, the more money gets sucked into that bottomless pit and wasted. That definitely does not help the working man whose labor pays for the largess.
            Who do the Super Rich prefer?
            http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2008/10/13/the-rich-support-mccain-the-super-rich-support-obama/

          • http://goggle jimradford

            yes sir i heard that allso when i was a kid,but when i became a tean i found it to be the other way around,so there for iam not a dem or rep, i dont vote for any one in office, you cant win.

        • 45caliber

          Many of the union members in the NE do vote a straight ticket as they are told by their leaders. Most minority groups also vote as per orders. I’ve voted a straight ticket once – when the other party didn’t have a single good person running. Most here in the South vote a mixed ticket.

      • independant thinker

        I forgot to add from the common man on the street.

    • http://PersonalLibertyWebsite robjohn

      As far as Dingy Harry being a member of the NRA: if you really want to see how he has voted on the 2nd check out http://www.knowharryreid.com. There are bout 43 time that he has voted, all against the 2nd the 44th vote is to get him out of there and send him back to searchlite. Remember his son is running for Gov for NV: a friend and I came up with “2 Reids don’t make a right! Never have Never will!”
      We in NV are sick and tired of Harry doing something for us: unemployment from 4% to 14%, banckrupcies leading the nation, please don’t do anything more for us, just go back to searchlite and fade into darkness.

  • RPS

    ‘reasonable precaution……………….’ is double speak for arbitrary and capricious governance. In a word: TYRANNY !!

  • Manuel

    I was in Idaho and saw this “wonderful” bumper sticker that said.
    “I am too old and fat to run; If you mess with me I will have to shoot you” That says it all for me.

    • Al Sieber

      Manuel, I agree with you.

    • 45caliber

      Manuel:

      I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy to carry.

      • http://goggle jimradford

        and u only have room for one.

    • http://LibertyDigest Michael G.

      I saw this sign posted in a paperback book a few years ago, and it still rings true: “Trespassers will be shot. Survivors shot again.” I think the author didn’t want any trespassers.
      It’s a shame we have come to this, but I know in my older age that we may have to follow through some day. Hope not!

      • Al Sieber

        “Trespassers will be shot, survivors will be sodomized”

      • http://goggle jimradford

        sign on door says, never mind the owner watch out for mr, fortyfive and his friends, true………..

  • Mark Gaunt

    The guy who broke into Mr Wollard’s home lives 3 miles away. The nearest police are 5 miles away. Who will get to Wollard’s house first. He better be armed. Good luck, sir.

    • Bob

      He’d get a better break with the perp.

  • http://PersonalLibertyDigest John Zagot

    Maryland is a bastion for liberal politicians that wants Big Government calling the shots for all of the little people that cant think for themselves. Just another reason for property owners being the only citizens allowed the priveledge to vote for elected officials. Big Brother knows Best. Jack move to a state with less liberals supported by ACORN, MoveOn.Org, George Sorros and Handgun Control Inc.
    Arborists for a Cleaner Environment!!

  • Kitty M

    Do I think my gun ownership is a fundamental right? SURE, because it is in the Second Amendment. It is a fundamental right that was decided by the Founding Fathers.
    Should everyone own a gun? NO !

    • Dennis III

      Kitty, Please excuse me NONE of Our RIGHTS come from the Founding Fathers. Or The Bill of Rights, Magna Charter or by the hand of ANY Man Other that Oue Own. They ARE OUR RIGHTS because we are Freemen/women, Only Slaves and Animals do not have Rights.

      • http://LibertyDigest Michael G.

        Dennis, you are absolutely right. My dog has the rights ‘I’ grant her. Her only rights are to be treated well, fed and watered, taken to the vet when necessaary, and be protected. She is all I have in this world, and I will honor her ‘rights.’

      • http://goggle jimradford

        no sir or mam in todays time every one has a rightthat means the so called slaves, and animals, you will hit a nerve whe you say slaves in my heart all are created equal, its just that some act stupid.

    • 45caliber

      Kitty: I agree with Dennis. In fact, the Constitution says that these are rights given by God and not man.

    • http://goggle jimradford

      thank you for setting it stright from our 2amendent, but what would it hurt to fight in the ring with gloves on for ten rounds.

  • Brad

    Since the law suit was filed in federal court, they will probably send it down to the MD state court system, just my opinion, there it will either be dismissed or will never see the judges eye’s. I currently live in Maryland and the majority of counties voted conservative in 08, the major metropolitan areas hold the majority of voters and are very staunch democ”rats”. Maryland is so liberal, if you through a stick it would hit one (liberal) every 9 out of ten times. The tide has been changing, slowly, and I believe this November some of our representatives maybe out of a job, Steny Hoyer is one I hope gets the boot from the 5 district, which I’m in.

    Back to the fedaeral law suit, I hope Mr. Woollard wins his case, because since living in this communist state it’s like living in California, they are both anti everything, take from the working class and give to the poor through their special social programs. Maryland has some of the highest taxes, we pay taxes on everything except food, I quit smoking because of the taxes the fed/state has imposed on cigaretts. Right now I’m better off without them (cigaretts) and feeling 100% better. Mr Woollard and SAF good luck on your law suit I hope a judge uses common sense when he/she rules on it.

    • 45caliber

      A judge? With common sense? What are you going to ask for next – a car with wings?

      • http://?? Joe H.

        45 caliber,
        No a short man that can slam dunk!!!

  • Lee Rader

    As a life long resident of Maryland, I can speak first hand on this states idiotic laws. 1) I was a cop for almost 30 years. 2) I still have to pay $100.00 for a carry permit. 3) I have to renew it every year, and give a good reason for wanting a carry permit. 4) When a citizen goes to the state police barracks to get a permit, you are treated as though you are a terrorist in training, looking for a weapon of mass destruction, and 5) If you follow the local news describing crimes, you will invariably see the disclaimer, ” Officers searched the area, buy could find no suspects.” DUH, by the time they show up, the perp could apply for a passport, and immigrate to France.

  • patrick

    Why all this concern about guns? Do you all remember the woman living in a southern state, who drowned her 5 kids in a bath tub? i been waiting for years for the gov’t and the liberal democrats to try and ban bath tubs becuase they killed 5 babies? this, my friends, is the mindset we are living with these days! the liberal deomcrats what to control and have gov’t run everything in our lives. We need to take our country back… start by voting out of office every incumbant!!!!!

    • Jana

      Exactly.
      I guess in China they will have to ban knives as now for the at least 3rd time someone came in to a Kindergarten there and killed 3 children and injuring others with a knife. This is horrendous, but it is people killing people, the weapon did not sprout legs and go in there by itself. It’s the same analogy for guns.
      I liked that bumper sticker from Manuel. “I’m too old and fat to run, if you mess with me I’ll have to shoot you. Good one.

      • 45caliber

        They have already banned the carrying of knives in England. Now they are trying to figure out how they can ban them at home. It is also illegal to carry an umbrella with a point on it or a cane that is sturdy enough to swing at someone. Lots of good this is doing as far as crime reduction.

  • Raggs

    WOW!!!! You have to prove you need to protect yourself?

    Boy-oh-boy isn’t that like saying you need to prove a need for your existence?

    • http://www.realcolorwheel.com/ DonJ

      This should prove our point.
      Two illegal aliens, Ralphel Resindez, 23, and Enrico Garza, 26, probably believed they would easily overpower home-alone 11-year-old Patricia (last name on file) after her father had left their two-story home. It seems the two crooks never learned two things: they were in Montana and Patricia had been a clay-shooting champion since she was nine. Patricia was in her upstairs room when the two men broke through the front door of the house. She quickly ran to her father’s room and grabbed his 12-gauge Mossberg 500 shotgun.

      Resindez was the first to get up to the second floor only to be the first to catch a near point blank blast of buckshot from the 11-year-old’s knee-crouch aim. He suffered fatal wounds to his abdomen and genitals.

      When Garza ran to the foot of the stairs, he took a blast to the left shoulder and staggered out into the street where he bled to death before medical help could arrive.

      It was found out later that Resindez was armed with a stolen 45-caliber handgun he took from another home invasion robbery. That victim, 50-year-old David 0′Burien, was not so lucky. He died from stab wounds to the chest.

      Ever wonder why good stuff never makes NBC, CBS, PBS, MSNBC, CNN, or ABC news……..?

      An 11 year old girl, properly trained, defended her home, and herself……against two murderous, illegal immigrants…….and she wins,
      She is still alive.

      Now THAT is Gun Control!

      • independant thinker

        “Now THAT is Gun Control!”

        Exactly, Exactly. Had not heard this one. I am sure it will show up in some of my non PC readings soon though.

      • David Weber

        Outstanding. Patricia is a hero (and nice shooting too!)

      • GreyChief

        REPOST***
        I checked at “snopes” also, and found they concluded the story about this young girl was false.

        They did find a similar incident from 1988 that they certify as true. An 11 year old boy shot and killed two burglars with his .22 rifle when they broke into his home while he was watching cartoons on TV.

        I wonder what the source is of these fictional stories. It is certainly not necessary to justify the RKBA by inventing such fictions. There are enough true incidents to prove the value of armed preparedness.

        Could it be that some who oppose the 2 A. are having a laugh by inventing and spreading such rumors, then suggesting that all similar incidents are the inventions of “gun nuts” ?

        • GreyChief

          This was a REPOST of a previous comment, which was posted — and then “disappeared”. The original post was in support of another post by someone who checked the “snopes” site, and found they had not found any verification of the claims about this incident, and did not think it was any more than a fiction.

          That comment, which my comment was supporting, ALSO “disappeared”. Why? I hope we are not expected to submit to the “thought police” to post here.

  • OldGoat1940

    Those Progressive morons need to be reminded that the thing that started the shooting war with jolly old England was when King George decided to confiscate the colonist’s guns and ammunition. I see certain folks buying 5.53mm military ammo by the PALLETS–I doubt they’re planning to shoot prairie dogs with ‘em.

    • http://?? Joe H.

      OldGoat1940,
      wouldn’t that be 5.56??

  • Bob

    An armed society is a polite society.

  • Dave and Judy

    In the Great? State of New Jersey, with all the police layoffs due to the Fat Guy in the Statehouse with how many Governor Mansions (2, 3, ?) dictating, why not allow everyone to pack a sidearm for their own protection since they want to have so many of our policemen and policewomen laid off? Isn’t that our Right? I am going to purchase a pistol and a rifle (30/30 with a scope) and protect ourselves and our property. Isn’t that our Right?

    • marvin

      Dave and Judy if you do get a 270 or 30/06 or 7mil mag they shoot strait shoot far and will stop just about anything

    • independant thinker

      Dave and Judy………………If you want the rifle to use as home protection leave the scope off and go with a red dot sight. However, a better weapon for home defence is either the handgun or a pump shotgun. If you want the rifle for hunting the 30-30 with scope is a good gun as are the ones Marvin mentioned.

      • http://?? Joe H.

        independant thinker,
        first off, thanks for having a screen name that is all lower case!! second, 7mm rifles shoot far and will stop people but hit a blade of grass between you and your intended target and it will mess up your trajectory!

    • rdnkrfnk

      as of right now the 30/06 has the cheapest ammo unless your getting an sks or ak47 and you can pick up a 30/06 fairly reasonable especially when looking into military surplus there was plenty of them made for our military that still very functional and can be sporterized for hunting purposes take for instance the m1 garand a fine piece of military weaponry and once the stock is lightened up a fine hunting weapon i have a cpl friends that kept the military stock and extra weight they say it improves accuracy at distance

      • independant thinker

        If I were to pick a rifle as my primary or even secondary home defence gun I would choose the SKS. Power wise it is roughly equivelent to the 30-30, it is very compact, has reasonable accuracy, and as you say the ammunition is very reasonable so you can to afford to practice more. While I have not priced 30-06 ammo your comments about it are logical except surplus ammo is rarely if ever available in a soft point or hollow point that is more suitable for home defence and must be used for hunting in most if not all places you can hunt with it. There is reasonable priced 06 commercial ammo available though if you look for it.

        • 45caliber

          Have you seen the 9mm HiPoint carbine? It is nice for a house gun.

          • JeffH

            45, I’ve been checking them out too…so cool…but I’ll keep my Sig P226 and my 12ga for my home defense.

        • DaveH

          None of the Big Game rifles would be good for home defense, unless you plan on shooting through the walls or want to take out 2 people with one shot. They kick like a mule, thus you pretty much can’t shoot from the hip unless you want your thumb damn near torn off (been there). And since they can easily go through walls, you wouldn’t dare use them in crowded locations (unless you don’t like your neighbors anyway). The most practical home defense weapons are both targeted by Big Government for extinction. Those are pistols and sawed-off shotguns.

          • independant thinker

            While I do not recomend them for home defence the SKS and the 30-30 can be fired from the hip. As stated above my recomendations for home defence are a pump shotgun or a pistol. In either one you should choose the largest caliber/gauge you can handle and shoot with reasonable accuracy.

      • Average Joe

        A good friend of mine recently turned me on to the “.17 HMR”, which I have fallen in love with. It is a great all around rifle in that it is light weight, inexpensive ammunition, great for hunting (I watched him take down a wild boar with one shot) and great for home protection.Go to you tube and check out some of the videos of this rifle in action. For a .17 caliber it does extreme damage.

    • 45caliber

      For home defense, nothing beats a shotgun. A good pump shotgun (Remington 870 is my preference) works great and you don’t have to aim that closely. Only in movies does the good guy always kill the bad guy with only one bullet. However a pistol is nice since it is small. I wouldn’t go with anything less than a 9mm and it is kind of small too. But keep in mind that you use a pistol only until you can get your hands on a rifle or shotgun.

      If you want a rifle, keep in mind that the 30-30 has an effective range of about a 150 yards. So does the SKS. Both are fine in a urban area but I prefer to have something that can reach out and touch someone. A 30-06 or a .308 is my preferences. An AR-15 actually fires .22 caliber bullets (they call them .223) and are meant to wound, not kill. You can kill with them but you usually need a lot of bullets. They also go fast enough that they can go through a house easily enough. Most rifle bullets will.

      • JeffH

        45caliber, gotta disagree with you on the .223/5.56 comment. They’re effective killers up to 600yds in capable hands and were developed to do just that. It’s an “old wives tale” that they were meant to wound and disable…the bullets and loads are designed to start “tumbling” on entry, which causes tremendous damage.

        • 45caliber

          I’m going by what I was told in the US Army. The instructor stated that “if you kill someone you take one enemy out of the battle. If you wound someone, you will take at least three out of the battle – the wounded man and two more to carry him back for treatment.”

          According to the US Army, the M-16 was designed to wound.

          It will certainly kill – but a heavy bullet kills far quicker and at once. The .223 bullet will kill IF you hit the right spot but generally not instantly – and most times it takes several shots to kill – even if the bullet does tumble.

          • JeffH

            I certainly won’t argue the point as you were and I wasn’t there. I agree with the bigger is better as the Garand was a major game changer with the 30.06 cartridge. I’ll give you some of the history on the M-16/5.56/.223.

            “The subsequent DARPA report, documenting the lethality of the AR-15, was instrumental in motivating the Secretary of Defense to reconsider the Army’s decision and eventually adopt a modified AR-15 as the US military individual weapon of choice. Although opposed by the Ordnance Corps, the Armalite AR-15 was adopted by the Secretary of Defense as the 5.56mm M16 rifle.

            Soon reports began appearing of the lethality of the new rifle. Unofficial reports said the AR-15′s light bullet, travelling at 3,300 feet per second, did cartwheels as it penetrates living flesh, causing a highly lethal wound that looks like anything but a caliber .22 hole, the US magazine Army reported in August 1963. Two US Army doctors who evaluated AR-15 wounds at an Army hospital in South Vietnam in 1966 reported that while wounds inflicted at close range had small entrance and exit holes, those at larger ranges exhibited small entrance holes whereas the exit wound is a gaping, devastated area of soft tissue and even bone, often with loss of large amounts of tissue, with disintegration of the bullet and minute splattering of lead.”

            http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/m16-history.htm

          • JeffH

            45caliber, I respect your word and wanted you to know that I’m not trying to start an arguement with you. I was under the same impression but as I thought of an injured enemy that could live to fight another day it didn’t compute vs a dead enemy. Thus I did a lot of research because I was going to build an AR and was debating whether it would be a 5.56/.223 or a .308…I chose the Nato 5.56/.223 based on lethality and cost…I’m far from rich, but I’ve got a nice CMMG/Del-Ton 20″ flat top with a 2.8-10 X 50 scope. 4″ groups out to 200 yards on 55gr fmjbt. I’ve also invested in some M855 62gr. green tip penetrators. I hope to get on some varmint coyotes before the year is out.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            Jeff &45,
            I was entering the service at the switch over from the M-14 to the M16. The M14 at 7.62 is a lot better stopping round, especially at 600 yards! you hit a man in the hand and it will knock him off his feet. I know he will get back up, but another dead center will put him down permanent! I never liked the M-16 as it seemed to jam under combat conditions. You had to keep it spotless and under combat conditions you can’t always do that. I did like the AK47 as you can pick it up pout of the mud and fire three full clips through it!!! I didn’t like the fact that they could use a nato round but we couldn’t use a commie round! the lip on the commie round was slightly larger in diameter thus it wouldn’t fit a 16 but the smaller rim on a nato round would fit the 47!

    • GreyChief

      Please! Don’t choose a high-power rifle for home defence, unless you live in the more remote, less densely populated, mountainous areas of the state.

      If you have to fire that weapon, the bullet can penetrate more than just the “perp”. It can go through inner walls and kill someone in another bedroom, or an outer wall and kill a neighbor.

      A .45 handgun or a short barreled shotgun would be a much better choice.

    • http://goggle jimradford

      u better belive it,only thing is make shure they are half way in your door so you wont go tou jail for shooting them, as for the rifle with the scop on it, make shure you have it back wards tomake them apear close ha ha.

  • Tom

    Would your corps qualify as a need to carry???

  • bob pa

    rick when reason and the constitution are thrown out then you have what we have now. politicians that think they are gods.and we get public non education that is not education but indoctrination of the public and students to be ignorant of truth, reality, common sence. and you get liberals, demigods, hollier than thou idiots telling us we need to feed the lazy the illegals, and the women that want to marry the government and pop out babbies so the stupitity is continued.

  • http://www,elmerscorbyjr.webd.com Elmer Corby

    The 2nd Amendment was written to insure that we remain free, Yes we can protect ourselves but also we
    the people can if necessary protect them selves and their rights form Federal takeovers, Examples’
    Health care, Bailouts, Education These are all state rights.

  • marvin

    the 2nd amend gun laws like the birth right in the 14 amemd [july 8 1868] 149 year ago we had children of slaves that were not citizens there for the 14 amend to give them citizen ship,but like the 2nd amend the 14th amend was preverted by liberal politicion,s to say and do what it was never intended for, or to say ,in 1868 we had no illegal problem ,the only way we the people can keep are rights is to fight for them,liberals have one thing in mind and i use mind loosly they will be in control of your ever day life on guns a liberal wants to have all the guns and citizen none,on birth rights it,s all for illegals and none citizens we the american citizens have no need for the 14th amend ,the only good or bad the 14th does is for someone to play are immigration system and help elect more liberals,the laws need be used as they were written and intended not for political gain to control we the people

    • mickey

      Yes, and I believe it states that the citizenship of the child belongs to the mother.

  • Art

    The people of this beautiful land need to insist that the politions get back to living with the constitution
    and remember that they are employed by the people. Get rid of the
    GREED and work for the CITIZENS. Let us get rid of the greed and useless people in Washington come NOV. 2010.

  • Raggs

    You know what is scary???…. Look at the incident in Conneticutt.
    The gunman suggested racism as the reason behind his madness.
    I don’t think anyone denies that this does exist, however the lamestream media and the administration have been pushing this type of agenda against the tea-party and Fox news… You have to wonder how many other sicko’s out there that have fallen into this trap..

    • marvin

      Raggs this man was on tape stealing beer and had other trouble he was told to quit or get fired,so in his mind he was saying i will show you people,did it have any thing to do with skin color mabe but i am inclined to think it was drugs and alcohol,these drugs will make you do strange things,but that is just one opinion,we may never know why

      • Raggs

        Well, I’m just bringing up a point I heard on the news.
        That this could have been a race issue, if so I can plainly see where he may have gotten the idea. I think we all understand that this guy had serious issues with drug and or alcohol abuse which put him over the edge.

        But my point being that the administration is pumping hate into the lamestream media calling any opposition to obama a racist. Surely this has to fuel people that believe they are oppressed by other classes of people rather that be of a different color or of an economic upper class.

  • GEORGEOTTO

    The right of self-defense is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and when the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.”

    – Henry St. George Tucker (in Blackstone’s Commentaries)

    As Sheriff Mack states; “Never never never give up your guns”
    The fight for the Law is a lifestyle, never give up!

    • 45caliber

      Both England and Australia have laws now that specifies that “self defense is not justification for taking the life of another.” There is an effort in Washington to pass the same law here.

      • DaveH

        Government has a vested interest to not stop crime. If they allow people to stop the criminals, it costs the government money.
        Imagine how many lawyers, judges, police, newsmen, and jailors would go wanting if crime was eliminated.

    • http://goggle jimradford

      i belive that some one said not until they pull the gun from my dieing hand will i ever give up my gun i belive in this, for any reason that my loved ones or my country,because iam a vetran.

  • marvin

    here is a idea all illegal in this country can become a citizen if they will have there tubes tied or have or get a vasectomy,you say why that is not legal or humane to infring up on there rights 1st thing they have no rights there illegals not citizens 2nd what about my rights not to have to pay for illegal people to have babies they can not afford to have can not feed or school or house,and to have 6/7/8 babies at my and tax payer expence you may think i am nuts or what ever but in 10 to 20 years this will be a third world country will be just like mexico were 75% of the police and goverment is corrupt and those that are not are killed,in all my years that is what i have saw coming,wake up america

    • DaveH

      As Government Grows, Corruption Flows.

  • mickey

    Not a real gun support person because I think too many that have them just want to use them just because… like my stupid neighbor who used my dog for target practice. He would have gone to jail but they changed the law and he just moved to another neighborhood.

    However, I am in support of the 2nd. Especially since Hillary went to the UN to deny us hand guns. funny how Hiltler had the same fear as obama has of an armed citizenry.

    • 45caliber

      Despite what they say, no law official is truly worried about criminals with guns. They are fearful of the lawful citizen with one who says, “Thou shalt NOT interfere with my freedoms!”

    • http://?? Joe H.

      mickey,
      your neighbor was an ass!! Anybody that would shoot a dog on its own property is full of the dark dank smelly stuff!!! Off its own property it had better be a danger to a person!

  • Dave

    The Second Amendment of the Constitution states “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”.

    Consistent with the legal argument of the US Justice Dept. against Arizona regarding immigration, it follows that:
    “Any federal, state, or local statute or regulation regarding ownership and possession of arms will pre-empt the supreme Law of the Land”. If the federal courts agree with the Justice Dept. in Arizona, then ALL statutes, regulations, ordinances, etc. regarding the possession and ownership of arms shall become null and void throughout the USA.

    Isn’t this an interesting quandary for President Obama and his team?

    • mickey

      this is exactly what he wants. Until the states secede from the union and form their own type of US, we will have more and more of this.

      Didn’t he sign the equalization bill because blacks got caught with crack instead of cocaine because the whites tended to have cocaine instead of crack? What kind of decision is this?

  • Dave

    To quote Thomas Jefferson:

    “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”

  • Average Joe

    In the words of Robert Heinlein:
    “I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do”.

    I don’t care what laws they pass, I will not comply if it violates my personal convictions and moral terpetude. I can either follow God’s law or I can follow man’s law, but I cannot follow both…so I will follow God’s law..regardless of personal consequences to me.
    The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, anything else it public policy (read Moral Law) and has no place in this nation. I get my moral law from God…not man.
    It is time for us as a nation to stand up to these “moralists” who pass legislation giving us their interpretation of morality. How?
    Obviously, voting won’t work …since they have “rigged” the vote with computerized voting machines that are programmable to come up with any vote they (those in power) choose to give us. It is not the vote that determines who wins, but rather he who counts the votes.
    So what is our recourse other than the vote?Well, there are acouple of things that come to mind:
    Jury nullification is my personal favorite. Refuse to convict anyone that has not committed a crime ( a crime must have a victim and there must be a loss of some kind). Speeding…not a crime…doing drugs….not a crime…murder…a crime….rape…a crime….most people don’t understand the difference between law and public policy (moral law). Moral law has no place in this nation and as such, we need to end it by refusing to convict people for non-crimes.
    The second option….if the first one gets kicked to the curb…involves a unified enactment of our second amendment rights and a march on D.C. to erradicate the vermin that have infested it for decades.

    • 45caliber

      Laws are supposed to be enacted solely to save you from the aggression of others. For instance, murder. Someone else attacked you.

      But the government is trying to get into the ability to pass laws that protect you from yourself. The seat belt law comes to mind. And if they have the right to pass laws of that type then they have the same right to determine where you will live, where you will work and even who you will marry.

      • http://goggle jimradford

        bull crap, no.no.no they will not tell me were to live or who to marry or anything i dont like, remember the song about viet nam be the first one on the block to have your boy come home in a box, that will take affeck when i thaink of being hurt or my loved ones.

      • Average Joe

        45caliber,

        Absolutely correct. The sole purpose of proper government is to protect our individual rights and defend our liberties, not to legislate moral law.

    • DaveH

      Joe,
      I respectfully disagree with your assessment of computerized voting. I think it would be our salvation. Instead of relying on the experts to keep the vote counts legitimate, we all could use a program to check how our votes were counted and to check the votes in the same database to see that those elected were truly elected legally.
      Here is my scenario of one possible approach:
      We could have two databases for each election. One database would store the ‘voter information’ (Identification, address, polling place, etc.). And the other database would store the ‘votes cast’ with a unique alphanumeric ID which was given to the voter at the polling place. The polling place would also be stored on this database to identify problem polling places. Only the voter would know his alphanumeric ID so secrecy would be preserved. The database would be accessible by the public. Anyone or any organization could check the ‘voter information’ database to see if any illegal voters cast votes. The votes in the ‘votes cast’ database could be easily tallied by anyone to see if votes were counted correctly and that the number of votes matched the number of voters in the ‘voter information’ database. Also, an individual voter would be able to check his alphanumeric ID to see that his votes are in the database correctly, and if not, he/she could notify the proper authorities or the proper news media.

      • Average Joe

        DaveH,
        I live in Florida and we all know the debacle that happened here in 2000. Shortly after the 2004 elctions, HBO produced a documentaty called “Hacking Democracy” it was released in 2006, which received several awards for journalistic exellence.If you have not seen this documentary, I suggest you do. I believe that after watching this documentary you will change your mind about computer voting. For your consideration, I am posting a link to the video, please take the next 80 mins. to watch this video. In advance, thnx for the comment and I hope this changes your view on computerized voting.Enjoy.
        http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7926958774822130737#

  • Average Joe

    For those that wish to know more about Juror’s rights and responsibilities:

    http://www.freedomcalendar.com/citizenrulebook.pdf

    As you can see, it is in PDF format and can be downloaded. Please take the time to read it and understand our place in fixing this nation. We as individuals are more powerful than even the POTUS when we have the knowlege with which to do it.

    • Average Joe

      Daniel Webster quotes:
      I apprehend no danger to our country from a foreign foe … Our destruction, should it come at all, will be from another quarter. — From the inattention of the people to the concerns of their government, from their carelessness and negligence, I must confess that I do apprehend some danger. I fear that they may place too implicit a confidence in their public servants, and fail properly to scrutinize their conduct; that in this way they may be made the dupes of designing men, and become the instruments of their own undoing. Make them intelligent, and they will be vigilant; give them the means of detecting the wrong, and they will apply the remedy.

      • 45caliber

        I’ve had several liberals tell me, “But why do you need a gun? Our government would NEVER try to enslave us!”

        • http://LibertyDigest Michael G.

          I’ve heard the same thing. I’m afraid we have been talking to the biggest pack of ‘dummies’ we’ve ever encountered.

          • DaveH

            They are not dummies. They just think we are and that we will swallow their deceptions.

        • MadDog7860

          I tell them it’s not the “Bill of needs” its the “Bill of Rights”

    • 45caliber

      You aren’t supposed to tell people that! They might actually want to exercise their rights!! Can’t you just see those liberals screaming?? It isn’t even taught in school any more!

      • http://LibertyDigest Michael G.

        I know what you’re saying. I’m a retired college prof., and I saw the same thing. But I made it clear who was in control of the classroom. As far as I was concerned I was ‘god’ in that arena. I rarely had trouble.

  • http://PersonalLibertyDigest Linda

    I HATE DUMOCRATS WISH THEY WHOULD GET BRAINS IN THEIR EMPTY HEADS IT JUST MIGHT HELP

    • 45caliber

      But when they do get a brain, they become conservatives! Horrors! The liberals know this and do everything they can to prevent this from happening.

      Ben Franklin once said, “If a man is not a liberal when he is young, he doesn’t have a heart. If a man is not a conservative when he is old, he hasn’t got a brain.”

  • sylviaM

    Our right to be armed came from GOD Not the GOV. I am armed to the teeth and have no PROBLEM with anyone ,*WONDER WHY* I am just a little Old woman but YOU can bet the farm I can PULL the trigger if I have to and anyone that knows me will agree. Now do I think everyong should have a weapon, the andwer is NO but *reason* being some people cannot defend themselves, I have friends that are helpless so to speak, and it is the duty of all of us that can and should protect the weaker and the ones unable to protect themselves. VOTE ALWAYS and VOTE WITH COMMON SENSE. WE MUST STAND OUR GROUND. GOD BLESS AMERICA

    • http://goggle jimradford

      i would be proud to be related to you, or to even know you, the reason is that you can make since of the right to own a gun and would help the people that can not help them selfs, but kids do not need to have guns till they become twenty one.

  • sylviaM

    jOE THE bible SAYS TO FOLLOW THE ten commandments and THE LAW OF THE LAND also it gives the crimes with the DEATH PENALTY or whatever, other than that I agree with parts of your post. GOD BLESS AMERICA

    • Average Joe

      The Bible gives us our Moral Law in the 10 commandments. I believe it says “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”not THE LAW OF THE LAND, that would be a contradiction in that Man’s law often in direct conflict with God’s laws. I’ll stick with God’s laws and will follow man’s laws….as long as it is in harmony with God’s law….I cannot follow two masters.

      • http://LibertyDigest Michael G.

        There’s also a place where Jesus tells people to: “Sell your cloke and buy a sword.” (In this case the word ‘sword’ is equivalent to a deadly weapon…

        • 45caliber

          Actually at that time a sword was equivalent to today’s “military assault rifle”.

          • Average Joe

            I believe that would have been the Bow and Arrow…the sword being closer to a .22…good up close, ineffective at ranges over 6-8 feet.

          • Average Joe

            oops…I meant to say a .25 Cal. the only gun ever made that you can stick in someones ribs….and miss…lol

  • Fred

    I agree with Dave, when the out of control government gets out of hand, then is the time to take action with whatever means I have. If they take away my defense, then I am a slave. I can vote and I can defend myself so I will VOTE 1st and pick up my guns as a last resort. November is coming and 545 self important folks are making the rules for all the rest of us. We need to replace them with folks that are interested in smaller government and more freedoms. I am sick and tired of the give-away programs and the Jackasses that seem to think that tax money is theirs to spend anyway they please with no accountability whatsoever. Get out and VOTE

  • rdnkrfnk

    i say if you dont like our country the way our founding fathers set it up then theirs plenty of other countries that would be more suited to yer likeing ie russia france england afghanistan iran iraq pick one and leave ours

  • http://gmail i41

    If the Black S–t Bird’s fellow employees had been carring, he might of only got one or two and probably not had the crap attitude of someone is picking on me, even it was the voices in his skull. If you look at the states with anti gun laws have some of the most unfriendly and smart a–ed jerks. New York and San Fran is classic examples.

  • Raggs

    You have to wonder what the Facist progressives will do to demise this. Yet another created crisis?

  • GreyChief

    The “MAY issue” form of concealed carry law must be abolished as unconstitutional. If a State chooses to require a permit to carry a concealed weapon, it must establish a “SHALL issue” form of such a law, spelling out the requirements as to proof of good character, sanity, training with weapons, etc.

    No “proof of need” can be required. Why does anyone need to state a reason — or offer any justification — to some bureaucrat as to why he should be “allowed” to exercise a right protected by the Constitution? Do we demand that anyone wishing to exercise the freedom of speech prove that he “needs” to do so, or that what he has to say will be of some benefit to society?

    States must also be required to honor such permits issued by other states. If a driver’s license issued by Utah is honored in Rhode Island, the same should be true of a CCW.

    As I recall, about a dozen of the hoodlums arrested at the Apalachin “crime convention” were holders of permits under the– MAY issue– Sullivan Law of New York (They don’t call it the ‘Sullivan Law’ any more – not since the word got around that “Big Tim Sullivan” used his law to control the hoodlums who didn’t recognize his authority and pay him his share of their profits.)

    I frequently hear the rationalization that “MAY issue” laws are needed, because the police have to be able to deny permits to those people they “know” are criminals, even if they have no record of convictions. It sure didn’t work out that way. The Apalachin incident gives the true picture — all such laws do is to make the exercise of a right a matter of the whim of a bureaucrat, and expand the opportunities for police corruption.

    • Raggs

      Well… I have a concealed carry licence, I had to go through a back ground check which included criminal and psyhological, a self defence class and I had to qualify on a range.
      This process took me one day, but it took my state 4 months to verify I have not been reported or convicted of a felony or a violent crime.
      I do understand the reason for that, after all if I will carry a weapon into the public it is not a bad idea to make sure that I’m not a fruitcake. Anyway most states have reprosity with people who have completed the course and found to be law abidding citizens.

      • GreyChief

        Is your CCW from a “MAY issue” state or a “SHALL issue” state?

        The delay you report makes it sound like a “MAY issue” state.

        I applied for my Florida (“SHALL issue”) CCW about a week before Christmas, and did not expect to see it until March. It was issued 4 Jan. Not bad service — about 2 weeks over the Holidays.

        • Raggs

          You know.. I’m not sure.. I do know some states just ask for your driver’s license and place of residence to abtain a CCW.
          I may need to look that up….
          To be honest I didn’t know there was a difference.

          • Raggs

            Come to think of it…
            In my state is was up too the A.G. to decide based on my back ground.
            In other words it is a “May” issue case. You make a good point!

          • GreyChief

            I’m thinking that your 4 month delay in “records checking” was either :

            — overburdened clerical employees

            — someone in a powerful position who dosen’t like “civilians” to be “allowed” to carry guns, and will delay what he cannot stop completely.

            Hell, don’t they have “instant check” on criminal records at gun stores?

          • GreyChief

            I sent the last comment before seeing your post about the A G of your state approving your CCW.
            WOW! Why not require the Governor to “allow” the citizen to exercise his rights. How dare the Governor delegate such authority to the A G!

            What state is that? I would guess MA, CA, HI, or CT.

          • Raggs

            AR…

          • Raggs

            The class I attended was from a former DEA agent.
            He had told me that it would take two day’s for the A.G. to decide rather if I was qualified by the state. He informed me that it would ( and did ) take up to 4 months to recieve a decision.

          • GreyChief

            For the record — Florida does not issue a CCW “on demand”. Your application must include a set of fingerprints that will be checked to prove you are not a “disqualified person” and you must prove that you know how to handle firearms properly by a certificate from a suitable course of instruction or similar document, e.g. a DD 214.

          • Raggs

            Prehaps it could be the case of overwhelming clerical personnel, when I went through the process it was soon after my state had recognized the need for self defence.. But that sounds like a bit of bullstuff!
            There has alway’s and will be a need for self preservation. So it comes down to who / whom is pulling the strings. Your point is getting clearer.

          • Raggs

            You are correct…. Finger prints that have been sent to the FBI.

          • GreyChief

            I am truly surprised to find any southern/western state with that much delay entailed in any gun law. I thought that was exclusively the provence of the north/east states (and IL).

            We have a lot of that foot-draging in NJ as well. I think a permit to PURCHASE a pistol has to be approved or dis-approved by the local police chief within 90 days. If you have one of those “only us cops should have guns” types, you can count on not getting your permit until the 90th day.

          • Raggs

            Well…. I’m not quite sure how to take it as well…
            It appears to be yet another incroachment of our rights in one form or the other. Basically I figure that is what it is all about.

            If you can prove you are a “good” guy you have to fill the needs of the many, if on the otherhand you are a “bad” guy you have to be dependant on the many in some form… So that leads us to the next problem… I believe everyone has had the same choice as me, so rather than me making excuses like obama I choose to do what is needed. I hate to also harp on the fact that we have a “so-called” president that is nothing more than my last flush in the toilet.

          • Raggs

            I bet a criminal can get a gun in 3 seconds.

          • Raggs

            only cops can have that type of gun, I dont get that one…
            Would that be like telling mexico to use bee-bee guns?

            I find that funny….

          • http://?? Joe H.

            Greychief,
            Here in Ohio, my background check to purchase went through in about three minutes flat!!!

          • DaveH
          • DaveH
        • independant thinker

          Raggs, either you ain’t from AR or you have no idea what you are talking about. I live in Arkansas and have a CCW. Arkansas is a “shall issue” state. The AG has no say in whether or not you get your CCW. If you pass the course and pass the criminal background check you must be issued the CCW. No official local, county, or state can deny you the permit if you meet the criteria for a CCW permit.

          • independant thinker

            It did take me a little while to receive my permit but not 4 months more like 6-8 weeks.

  • Stephens55

    That is Obama’s goal to take our guns. He is stacking the court with his judges. He is also banking on the U.N. Small Arms Treaty. The current senate will ratify it and Obama will sign it, whick will trump the 2nd admenment. Obama is following Hitler’s plan. Citiozen’s own guns, subjects do not.

  • Red Baron

    To think 4 judges on the Supreme Court ruled that only government authorities have the right to gun ownership. The Constitution
    was written to contradict what these 4 socialist judges voted.
    After the new U.S.A. fought a war with the British, who were not in favor of citizens having gun ownership; the USA had a good reason why our Constitution wanted its citizens to have the freedom of gun ownership. No matter what the Constitution reads, the socialist on the Supreme Court will always vote their political needs. When the left gains just one more seat, with a total of five; they will really be able to set a side the Constitution, and make decisions from their heart. A progressive Supreme Court is what Obama promised, if elected.

  • http://YouTube.com/CanadaLarry Lawrence Edward Calcut

    Can someonr tell me… what killed Custer at the little Bighorn? Was it stupidty. airogence, a bullet from friendly fire, bad food from the cook, or the well placement of an arrow from a American Indian’s bow?
    Learn Archery my American friends.

  • whozzit

    The Constitution is the law of our country and no tricky interpratations of that document, or the Bill Of Rights, deserve any hearing, whatsoever, in any part of this great nation. Unfortunately, these interpratations are there to be ignored at great risk to the citizens of the United States. I, myself, ingnore them with great vigor as should any other competent gun owner in this great Republic. I personally am not aquainted with any individuals whe have not fired a rifle or handgun at some time in their lives and, likewise, I am not aquainted with anyone that does not own a rifle or handgun of one type or another. And, yes, I live in the Great State Of “Kalifornia.” I believe that a law abiding citizen caught CCW in most, if not all states, is guilty of a misdameanor and, in that sense, can be basically ignored. It is not a felony. Confiscation of said firearm is another matter but, as an owner of many, I can afford that. If asked whether you are licensed to CCW, you should just carry a miniturized copy of the Constitution and the Bill Of Rights. A law abiding citizen needs no other permit.

  • photojoe

    The term “militia” as used in the second amendment means every able bodied male human over the age of fourteen. Every citizen was expected to own and be proficient with firearms to protect his family and property and to be on call as needed to join with others to protect his community or state. It was never intended to be a collective right of an organized and paid army or “National Guard”. In most cities the police response time runs from several minutes to several hours while an armed citizen can respond in seconds. Has anyone noticed that most gun crimes occur in minority neighborhoods in big cities that have very restrictive anti-gun laws? The Democrats have always tried to disarm the law abiding minorities.

  • http://gunlawsuitehitsm.d. Fred

    All this talk about what they are doing NOW let me mention what we are not doing VOTE EVERY ONE OF THEM OUT start in nov.let no one stay in office this election AND the next in 2012 if we dont kick them ALL out we are going to lose THEY COUNT ON US to keep believing there LIES they are aaaalllllllll in office to make there mark and line there pockets IF WE THE PEOPLE KICK THERE BUTTS OUT EVERY ELECTION WE CAN KEEP D.C. CLEANER notice not clean just cleaner THAT IS THE ONLY WAY WE CAN POSSIBLE STOP THE TAKE OVER OF OUR RIGHTS GET IT VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE ALL OF THEM OUT OUT OUT dont let them stay in long enpugh to learn how to screw us as Paul Harvy would say Good Day

  • DaveH

    Not for Gun-Controllers:
    http://gunowners.org/a080410.htm

  • Geronimo

    In Montana I’m known as that freaky half-breed that speaks fluent German and packs a Luger. I tell my liberal friends that I carry all the political correctness I need in a shoulder holster. When they tell me that the only reason you carry a gun is that you don’t feel masculinly endowed enough so you feel you need to carry a gun to compensate I tell them: ‘As long as we are playing Freudian games I can only wonder at the sexual orientation of those individuals who becone hysterical when encountering as object that is symbolicaly masculine

  • AndyA

    The right to own a gun is as natural as a right to own a knife, drink clean water or even drive a car or motorcycle on a free road. And all roads should be free! A gun is only as safe and trustworthy as the person behind it.

    • http://goggle jimradford

      i agree with you about the right to carry a gun, but how about the man or woman who goes and fights for there country they are allowed to have guns to defend them self while at war but come home to the united stats of america and no rights to have a gun to protect them sels or there familys, and you must have a gun permit, bull crap, my hands are not dead yet, and the right to bear arm will not be took from me, by a person that does not belive the right to bare arms,

  • GreyChief

    See August 5,2010 @ 5:59 AM. Let’s hope no more comments “disappear”.

    • GreyChief

      Yep, more comments have “disappeared” without a trace.

      RE-REPOST***
      I checked at “snopes” also, and found they concluded the story about this young girl was false.

      They did find a similar incident from 1988 that they certify as true. An 11 year old boy shot and killed two burglars with his .22 rifle when they broke into his home while he was watching cartoons on TV.

      I wonder what the source is of these fictional stories. It is certainly not necessary to justify the RKBA by inventing such fictions. There are enough true incidents to prove the value of armed preparedness.

      Could it be that some who oppose the 2 A. are having a laugh by inventing and spreading such rumors, then suggesting that all similar incidents are the inventions of “gun nuts” ?

  • http://gunner689 gunner689

    The 2nd Ammendment is the re-set button for the Constitution. The first 10 Ammendments are known as the Bill of Rights and are directed to indivdual rights, not gvt. rights or power. The federal Gvt. as it now exists is the enemy of a free nation and a free citizenery.
    It needs to be revamped, hopefully peaceably by the ballot and not the bullet. The latter is our last hope to maintain our freedom and liberty.
    For self defense consider the Taraus Judge or Public Defender. These are revolvers that fire 410 shotgun shells. They make some excellent s.d. cartridges for these firearms. they can also shoot .45 Colt cartridges. Put on an Crimson Trace lazer and you have an excellent home defense system for 4 legged or 2 legged predators.

  • Dee

    We have a right to protect ourselves. If this damn government confiscates our guns, the crime rate will go up.
    Just ask England and Australia.
    Scotland lets every citizen have a gun and their crime rate is down.
    Supid damn government.

  • http://www.myrtlebeachelectric.com gunrightsordie

    I hope that people continue to fight for these rights. I believe that America is waking up just a little bit since many of our politicians have shown their true colors.

  • http://www.myrtlebeachcomedy.com gunrightsordie

    I also believe that we are going to make some changes come next November.

  • http://gmail i41

    Custer was killed up close to Hardin Montans, his first problem was a over conifent arrogant pretty boy, he would listen to his scotts or wait for help. He refused Gatlin guns, which showed his over confidence. He had several bullet holes in him, probably before he was shot full of arrows, he didn’t have his genitaly was not removed by the squaws, as all soldiers had done to them. Indians account is that squaws were removing privates from the soldiers while some were still alive, usually a few blows from a war club purried their brain matter, and no pain. He had about hte same educated personality as Omoron, aggorant, over bearing a educated dink weed and got a lot of kids killed. The average soldier was about 120-150 lbs and pretty young. These men dies on buffalo grass and the site is along Highway 212 on the south side. After lying in the hot Mt. sun a quick burial was needed, the soldiers looked like indians, full and bright red. He was just another Washington rear kisser and as usual it was another government f–k up on a mission. Just like the reservations have proved to be, another east coast idoit beltway foggy bottom screw up.

  • http://gunlawsuitehitsm.d. Fred

    oh no the word enpugh????? anough!!!!!!sorry

  • independant thinker

    Try again. I think you have a good point but am not sure you sound like you have had 10 times as much scotch as I have this evening.

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.